Reporter refuses to believe London store owner wasn’t attacked by white people

london riot interview

When the media reports that “youths” are rioting in London they omit the fact that they are primarily “minority” youths. No, they just can’t bring themselves to inject that note of race into the discussion.

Here’s a clip in which a British reporter is appalled when store owner Big Jim says he found “at least 100 black youths” looting shops in his neighborhood:

Reporter: “You’re not being stereotypical there?”
Big Jim: “No, absolutely…”
Reporter: “Are you sure that they were black? I’m sure they weren’t all black, were they?”
Big Jim: ”OK, then. Let me just say they weren’t all black. I was the white guy there.”
Reporter: “Well, there were probably other white guys there as well.”
Big Jim: “I didn’t see any.”

Tea Partiers. Yeah, that’s the answer. These rioters were probably members of the Tea Party. Everyone knows how violence prone they are.

This post was last modified on August 11, 2011

anarchyLondonprotest
editor:

View Comments (87)

    • Overall Sidekick people will just thumb down like the ignorant people they are and not say anything or say something outlandish and stupid and then pretend that they won the debate :-/

    • Unfortunately, they will discount it as a conservative hit piece, just from the title. Libs will refuse to read this.

      • You are right, unfortunately. The progs will scream that had they more funding, then the welfare state would have worked perfectly.

  • My bad, I did bring up China to you and Somalia to Kimmey....at least I am man enough to say when I am wrong...unlike some people on here

  • You are correct, many things have contributed to the probelms. But let's take China for one second. Now granted they are communist and getting facts from them is pretty hard especially when the government is underf control of info leaked to the public, but Britain gave back their city and it isn't a hell hole. You say I shouldn't simplify the problem, but I think the problem is that simple. When people try to over think problems like they do in America such as liberals do, it causes more problems than it solves. I knew typing my statement above would received flack, but people are going to have to face reality at some point to be able to fix the problem. America has spent a lot of money and lives trying to help people of Africa (I know, I was in Mogadishu in 1993) It doesn't work. And to start blaming slavery and evrything because of their problems doesn't help. Many countries have been enslaved and are thriving now. But if they know we will keep sending money and food to them, they will never have to act responsible and do for themselves. They thrive on the white guilt and some have made a good living off of it, just ask jesse jackson and al sharpton.

    • Hong Kong was and is a cash cow. It had been a mature capitalistic city-state before the hand off. Now, the PRC is smart enough to leave that massive revenue generating free market system alone.

      In Africa you have many illegitimate governments that prevent normal economic and social development. Again, I think you are over simplifying. Skin color is not a determinant of anything.

      • "Again, I think you are over simplifying. Skin color is not a determinant of anything." Exactly. It would be nonsense to state that the countries that were under Russian Communist rule, that unfortunately are still being developed, have a white problem.

      • True, but Hong Kong wasn't always, they had the same resources as does Africa, which is funny because China and Russia are right now trying to get their hands on the very resources of Africa as we speak. I will make this simple for you sidebar, and I want you to be honest. I will bring this closer to home. You have a family of four and you are white, a movie just ran over a little bit and it is around 1030 at night, now would you want to step out of a theatre that is in downtown Compton or would you want to come out of a theatre that is in somewhere tha tis like Downtown Roseville, California. I want you to answer honestly because we need to face these problems not make excuses. I think culture has alot to do with it, i didnt neccesarily say skin color in my previous statement, but nice try on trying to ping that on me. When music such as "rap" degrades women, talks about killing police and that the white man keeps them down, I don't want anything to do with that culture. But as I have stated before not all blacks folow this trend and they are typically the exception and not the rule. Sorry sidekick, keep fooling your self or you can do your own research. Black Liberation Theology is a dangerous cult and that is the Church the current President is from. Trust me, I have many black Professional friends and they tell me the same thing, just they have gotten out of that culture. Now that being said, white peoplel do have their Casey Anthony's and Maddof's, but when a certain part of the Country makes up about 13-15% but commit 65-70% of the crimes......there is a problem.

        • Ok, I think you are mixing things up. I agree that Black Liberation Theology is straight up Marxist/black-based racism. On the other hand the Aryan Brotherhood is straight up white racism. So that washes out. I'm from New England and there are plenty of dangerous Irish neighborhoods in the Boston area that I would be uncomfortable in. Charlestown, for example. Compton is bad but I used to do business in Liberty City / Miami and never had a problem. Some Rap and Hip Hop project terrible messages and while the artists are often black the record promoters and producers are usually white. Clay, you seem to look at everything through the prism of race I see things through politics and
          economics. I do not deny that politics can be raced based for good or ill but there is no racial disposition to criminal or self destructive behavior.

          • LOL side kick, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts TOp prodcuers of rap are as follows 10) Rick Rubin, white 9) Timbaland, black 8) Kanye West, Black 7) The BOmb Squad, black 6)Marley Marl, black 5) Large Professor, Black 4) RZA, black 3)Dr. Dre, black 2) Pete Rock, black 1) DJ Premier, black. Most are white? Really? 1 out of 10 is white. Also I don't look at life in a prism of race, I look through a prism of reality. Aryan Brotherhood is a Prison based Gang, hardly compareble to a Church theology. Mostly people join the Aryan Brotherhood after they are convicted of a crime....but Liberation Theology is open to any black person who wants to step into the church and hate whitey...so no, it isnt a wash. Please try to keep your facts straight, I don't mind the debate, but when you start throwing out lies, such as you stated above, then I get frustrated. If you have to start lying to make a point.....then it truly isn't a debate at. I am glad we are discussing this, because this is what we need to do, like I said in a previous statement. So who is mixing it up? You think it is racist just to bring up facts when I think it is racist not to. We need more discussion to get a better understanding. You are taking the side of a liberal and why we need to pump more money into the welfare system, I would love to see blacks and whites succeed on merit and hard work...which one do you choose?

          • Hey, jack off, I've been civil up to now. I've countered every one of your points because they are generalizations and oversimplifications. Illegitimate governments have ruined Africa - which is where this discussion started. Then you brought up Hong Kong and I answered that. Then you moved on to Black Liberation Theology and I responded. I'm not lying about anything. The major record labels/ distribution channels and radio/media companies are not black owned. Period. For example, Def Jam is largely owned by Polygram. I should have been more precise and said that the record company owners are largely white.

            This thread began with what happened in the UK and to say that it is a purely racial thing is stupid. Greece is going through similar problems is
            that racial too?

            " So who is mixing it up? You think it is racist just to bring up facts when I think it is racist not to. We need more discussion to get a better understanding. You are taking the side of a liberal and why we need to pump more money into the welfare system, I would love to see blacks and whites succeed on merit and hard work

            I don't think it is racist to bring up facts but you haven't done that. You blame what happened in England on race. I blame it on their failed welfare system. Same goes for Italy, Spain., Greece, and Portugal. You are a moron if you think I'm taking the liberal POV on this but then again you are a moron because you cannot see the root cause of this mess: liberalism itself.

            Really, are you that stupid to think skin color is a determinant of behavior?

          • You are right on all aspects of this post Sidekick. I mean it is incredible that he is not even able to spell my name correctly after all those times of continually typing it. :-/

            I stated several times that I have no problem believing it on that particular case, but the fact is that the rioters are not exclusively black, hence my skepticism. However if they happen to be all black on his one store it is what it is. However to go from there to stating that the ENTIRE riot was due to black issues is preposterous.

          • Really? we have nearly 15 Trillion debt problem, 1.5 trillion deficit problem, just downgraded and we are broke. Social Security broke....and you are worried about if I spell your name correctly? That's the argument you want to pick? Like I said before, I have read for a very long time, and I konw where the clicks are on this Website, you guys continually beat up on Olivia, and rightfully so, she is a moron, but for you to criticize me for spelling your name wrong is a bit childish...don't you think? ANd sidekick we will agree to disagree. You sir are the one that started with the namecalling which I believe people resort to when they don't have the brain power to debate civilly. Not once did I call you a name but whatever. I have refuted all your claims and even pointed out where you out right lied and then tried to change it in mid debate...as far as I am concerned, I am done with this Thread. I guess i will debate you on another in the future.

          • You didn't "debate" me. You didn't prove nor refuted nor did anything. All you did was pose as better than others. Your "debate" was lame and frivolous. It was weak. You can be done with the thread all you want, regardless your rant was crazy and proved nothing.

          • Sorry, Clay.  When you call me a liar I call you a jack off.  You seem to like to write in a combative style.  Funny how you are so thin skinned.  I see that with Internet Tough Guys™ sometimes.  You have tied economic problems to looting in England.  That part is correct.  Where your argument (for me) breaks down and has zero credibility is when you try to make the case that it is a black problem. 

            "I agree it is a black culture problem. Look at the world today and tell me what continent has the most problems, famine and disease. RIght now Somalia is killing off its own people and raping the women and children."

            "America has spent a lot of money and lives trying to help people of Africa (I know, I was in Mogadishu in 1993) It doesn’t work. And to start blaming slavery and evrything because of their problems doesn’t help."

             I stated and I believe it correct that it is the corrupt and illegitimate governments that lead to the social misery in those countries.  It also has nothing to do with the riots in the UK.

            You are incorrect about social unrest in the other European countries I mentioned.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/spanish-protests-turn-violent-with-121-injured/2011/05/27/AG6iVpCH_blog.html

            http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/michael-shedlock/spain-icelandic-revolt-protests-spread-to-italy  

            http://www.irishcentral.com/story/news/people_and_politics/irish-dail-parliament-in-lockdown-after-violent-protest-93462209.html

            http://beforeitsnews.com/story/289/015/Italian_Students_Stage_Violent_Protests_Against_Reforms.html

            The above links demonstrate that what is happening in the UK is happening in at least four other countries.  The root cause of the violent protests is the failure of the liberal welfare system.  It is not racial.  While there were a lot of minorities in the UK rioting there were plenty of whites too.  The point of the article was to show how PC the Brits are not that there is a "black culture problem".  Like I said before, if a government infantizes its population the "kids" will act up.

            You also tried to make the case that what happened in Wisconsin was somehow related to the UK riots.  Again,it seems that you tried to tie unrelated occurrences to one cause.  From what I read that was indeed a racist attack on whites.  Unmotivated by anything other than thuggery.  Again, you have a multi-racial riot in England motivated by again...the collapse of the welfare state.

            It seems that most huge violent spontaneous protests are begun at the lowest economic rung but every ethnic or racial group occupies that rung.  Obviously, the welfare recipient class is the "victim" of fiscal austerity measures.  Nothing new there. What else is new?  

            Finally, every time the G20 or some other world economic summit meets, you see massive violent protests in the host city.  Is that a black culture problem too?  

          • Everything I brought up has been facts. You are right about Greece Italy and spain that the root problem is Liberlism, not doubting that one bit, I too study Politics but my main study was medicine. You said producers and pointed out the fact that it wasn't.Now you say record labels, changing your story in the middle of a debate...tsk tsk tsk. Cry all you want or spin how you like, I could care less. But that is what you said. You are taking out of context some economic instability brought on by 30 or plus years of liberalism to the problems in UK, Italy and spain. But you jumped into the fray saying that skin color is not at any of a sign of self destruction. I brought up China to prove a point to Kimmey, not you about imperilism....not social economics...who is confusing it now? Also on that point, Johanessburg was the same way and both cities were given back to their repective Countries in the about the same time....now look at both cities now!!!! You compare Liberation Theology to Aryan brotherhood...you should of said Bloods and crypts are awash because of the Amish. The reason for your frustration is I have proven my point every time and now you are whining about it. AGAIN, I agree with you on Italy Spain and Greece, but that was not what I was saying to Kimmey at the beginning. This is what happens when you jump in the middle of a conversation. BTW, how many looters are there in Spain, Italy and Greece? That is what the whole story was about in the first place, not social economic problems...get a grip dude and relax.

          • "The reason for your frustration is I have proven my point every time and now you are whining about it"

            Number one I'm not frustrated by the conversation and number two no one is whining. You started off this thread by saying the riots were a black culture problem. Then you cringe when I called out the racist overtone of that. My story has never changed and I certainly didn't change the tone of the debate with the record ownership thing since the point I'm making is that a lot of whites are making money off the ghetto culture to the detriment of the black community.

            People like you make it about race, I make it about politics and in this instance it is the failed liberal welfare state in England. That country infantized its population with their nanny state and now the "kids" are acting out since the free shit has run dry. I don't see it as much more complicated than that other than their wide open immigration policy made the welfare state collapse sooner than it would have otherwise.

          • I never cringed at your statement, I still stand by my stance even more so. You bring up Italy, Spain and Greece as going down the same path, but you prove my point that this whole story was about, looting. I have not heeard any reports from these 3 Countries, but I did see rioting in the street of Greece, but no looting. I as many other people in this country are sick and tired of bringing these to peoples attention and then being accused of racism. The race card is finally being denied in this Country. I am ust tired of people getting a free pass on the color of their skin. If you don't think it doesn't happen with affirmative action then you sir are either blind or ignorant. The funny thng about the video above and you suffer from the same thing, the guy told the reporter who it was but she didnt believe him....and he was an eye witness...just WOW.

          • Go google Greece and Looting; you'll get a lot of results.

            Moving on, once again you simply don't get the message. Sidekick has repeatedly asked and perhaps accused you of believing that the color of someone's skin dictates their behavior. This is a non-starter for most people. Environmental conditions load and fire the gun. Growing up in a neighborhood where everything you receive is from the government and never earned is the issue. Getting out of a system of traps set up by the government is rather hard for an average poor person, whether black or white.

            Go look up welfare statistics. There's whites there. Go look up looting videos in Katrina. There's whites there. Go look up looting videos in the UK. There's whites there.

            You run a debate by using a non-starter unbased opinion as some sort of factual statement and run everything from there. I'm sorry, I don't believe the color of someone's skin dictates their probability of success. I don't believe how someone starts in life dictates their probability of success. I do believe that a system that incentivizes non-productivity and counter-culture is responsible, and I'm pretty sure Sidekick agrees.

            You should, instead of blaming blacks from the get-go, blame the system. That is a much better approach to the matter.

  • LOL, Kimmey, exactely, in the 1900's when imperilism is at its peak. You stated it your self. These Countries you speak of weere doing really well, then the British, France and a few other Countries left and look what happened? I am not talking about the 1900's and for you to somehow equate the imperilistic Countries of a century ago is somehow the problem now. I put in Mugambe just so you can refute that claim, but you can't. It is easy to point fingers at other countries, but ultimately they are going to have to take responsibilty for themselves...period. I also put in Johannesberg for the same reason....when whites left, it turned into a hellhole. I just don't believe your logic about imperilism is the cause for Africa's problems. You can't sit there and call people racist when they are truly stating the facts. Because in reality, in every society, in some shape or form, has had the problem of slavery, just not blacks....Learn your history Kimmey, or get off your high horse.

    I also found it cute how you stated that somewhere you saw some whites looting, but couldn't remember where...you are starting to sound like that looney OLIVIA.

    The one thing I do have to agree with is that where Islam is, you will find the down trodden, the MOST poor and people are suffering. But my comment was not racist, nor was that first comment....hell, I support Herman Cain, and was very pleased with his performance today. But you madam need to learn the true definition of what "racism" is, you sound more like a liberal when you apply to everything everyone says.

    • There are some things that you posted that I want to answer to directly:

      "I am not talking about the 1900′s and for you to somehow equate the imperilistic Countries of a century ago is somehow the problem now."

      That is nonsense. You were not talking about imperialism, but I was in response to your statement. You obviously lack reading comprehension. I was stating that there is no "black problem" per se but a problem stemming from many years back due to many aspects of their history. One has to look at history to see the patterns as to what is happening now. If you don't do that, you are not looking at the entire problem with intelligence. You are being biased and I was providing another perspective.

      "I put in Mugambe just so you can refute that claim, but you can’t." Don't assume as to what I can or cannot refute. I didn't have time to go into every single example, I posted one and you weren't even ABLE to comprehend what I actually wrote.

      First off before attempting to make me look bad (which by the way fails) try to at least type his name right it is Mugabe not Mugambe. Mugabe fits perfectly well with what I have already stated that you failed to understand. Colonialism/Imperialism led to nationalism which lead to leaders like him. It is the same story. His politics were tainted by Maoism (another form of Marxism), he is a socialist/marxist whatever you may want to call him. After year of unwanted rule, many people saw those types of governments as answers to getting rid of colonial rule. I am not even sure why is that hard to understand. Those governments pretty much changed one totalitarian rule to another totalitarian rule. The bases of these rules stem from philosophies that were in reality foreign to Africa. Again not sure what about that is hard to understand and again many OTHER African countries do not have those governments and are doing very well so again not sure how you can assume that the problematic countries is just due to them being black.

      "It is easy to point fingers at other countries" HAHAHAHAHAHA! Okay I know why you are laughing because this is pretty funny. What EXACTLY are you doing? You are blaming other countries and cultures for what is happening to England! Can you see the irony of that statement?

      "... but ultimately they are going to have to take responsibilty for themselves…period." And overall they are especially those who are successful, so what is your point? However, it seems that you just don't want to admit that the history of the countries you mentioned, has a lot to do with their present state. You just want people to agree that yeah they have a problem because they are black and that is not the truth. It is simplistic, naive and racist.

      "I also put in Johannesberg for the same reason….when whites left" "Whites" did not leave, they just stopped being the minority rule over the majority of blacks. South African blacks under apartheid had it really bad. It was not a boom time for them at all. It was a hellhole THEN what the heck are you talking about? You have no idea what you are talking about. Now blacks have come into the middle class and many are able to be part of the upper classes something unthinkanble before 1994. Is there still poverty, yes. There are lot of problems that are not easily resolved, just like OURS in this country. Why are you so upset over what they do anyway? Like you said they should be their own nation, what they do or fail to do shouldn't affect you and it is not a reason for what is happening in England either.

      "I just don’t believe your logic about imperilism is the cause for Africa’s problems." Logic? Logic is not the right word. Thesis would have beem more appropriate or else historical recount. Like I said you have to look at the history, many African countries were prospering, then used and colonized, then forms of marxism took hold and lead to the problems they have today. It is a process. One of the many reasons for the regional chaos in many countries is because of the borders placed there by the colonization process. Certain regions were separated by artificial borders, separating tribes and families and traditions. Now could be there be other reasons before colonialism that caused problems until today, perhaps, but like I said it is a process and one thing leading to another. You just dont want to see it because like I said colonization was done by European powers. You are funny you don't want to put blame on other countries that YOU DON'T WANT TO, but you want to put blame on those that you don't like. Funny.

      "You can’t sit there and call people racist when they are truly stating the facts." What facts? That there is a "black problem" and this is happening because they are all blacks and you put as example people in Africa? How is that a fact? Those are not facts. That is an opinion, erroneous opinion in my opinion. First asserting that Africa or any country is a hellhole because of a black problem is a racist stance. Second, you cannot explain why many African countries, black communities and individuals prosper and do just fine so that completely shatters the black problem theory. If being black is a problem and being black makes it impossible for a society to prosper, there wouldn't be prosperous African countries nor communities in this country and others. Third as it has been stating in the article I posted yesterday or the day before that and many videos online and on tv this particular riot had many different types of people it even included children. This wasn't a riot of black people. The FACTS have proven that. Fourth putting as an example what is happening in other countries as a reason for what is happening in this country is a weak argument.

      "Because in reality, in every society, in some shape or form, has had the problem of slavery, just not blacks….Learn your history Kimmey, or get off your high horse."

      You need to be the one to get off your high horse. All I did is present you with history and facts. What you did is present ignorance. You are the one that should pick up a book about African history and not just color your world with the naive understanding that the color of one's skin is an indicator of what a country is. I don't have anything against the fact that countries all over the world had a problem with slavery and not just for blacks, but that is not the point. It was a semi-question as to better ascertain your philophies, but they have become quite clear.

      "I also found it cute how you stated that somewhere you saw some whites looting, but couldn’t remember where…you are starting to sound like that looney OLIVIA."

      I find it cute that you completely ignored the links that I myself posted and the links posted by others indicating the racial and economic composition of the riots. I stated that I saw it on FOX. At the time I couldn't put a link as I wasn't in a position to do so, but then posted a link later on. Did you ignore that on purpose? I guess you did as it wouldn't have worked out to put that stupid statement of yours. You are the only one that "sounds" looney. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you are Olivia.

      "The one thing I do have to agree with is that where Islam is, you will find the down trodden, the MOST poor and people are suffering. But my comment was not racist, nor was that first comment….hell, I support Herman Cain, and was very pleased with his performance today. But you madam need to learn the true definition of what “racism” is, you sound more like a liberal when you apply to everything everyone says."

      And you "sir" should next time actually read and comprehend what is being posted, before going on about what I know or don't know. Also I dont use the racist words willy nilly and also you don't know a lick about me. It is Kimmy not Kimmey... :-/

    • Clay,

      I don't know what exactly you find funny, I do find funny that it seems that you have no idea what I actually wrote. The countries were doing well BEFORE European Imperialism. That was the point. They were not up to par AS PER European standards perhaps, but they were doing just fine. In fact that attitude that they were savages IN NEED of white colonization is a racist attitude. It is possible to theorize that they would have continued to do well and as time passed, and technology and communication increased, they would have done just fine on their own; had they not been colonized. Instead of colonization, had these countries been treated as equal partners in commerce/industry/capitalism things would have been highly different.

      Marxism (and its nationalistic branch) seemed like the answer AGAINST Imperialism. As we all should know Marxism and its derivatives do not work and without citizens willing to revert to a previous state (which was pretty much destroyed by the colonization) or else embrace a better state like bening forms of democracy-republicanism (due to ignorance or a lack of a benign leader) the country WILL become a cesspool and become prey to yet ANOTHER totalitarian force (like Islam). That was the point of my post which seems to have escaped you.

      You seem to assume that those countries were doing well under colonialism only, as in, it was better for them to be colonized and that is not at all correct. That is actually a very standard liberal/racist point of view. Liberals believe that they are betters who should control those that are lesser than. That is crap. Humans are all equal. There is no human that is better than another no matter their background or how they look. Even if some aspects of their cultures "improved" due to technology or whatever the case maybe, the point is that it was a conqueror imposing himself on the conquered. No one likes to be conquered and imposed upon forcefully especially if they have racist or better than you attitudes. Had their attitudes been different, partnership and respect instead of imposition and control who knows how many lives could have been spared?

      Regardless of some colonization on OTHER African countries, they were able to surpass that history and have very good economies and societies. They are obviously doing something right and they are still black. So your assertion that there is an overwhelming black problem is stupidity. The problem is the philosophies encompassing the countries and what the leaders of those countries do with those philosophies. You mentioned South Africa, with almost 50 years of apartheid (by the minority white population) was the major reason for the poverty that encompassed that country. It takes time to undo decades of dictatorship and overall South Africa is coming up, but there will always be poor people in any country, but South Africa has come up in the world.

      Interestingly enough one of the many reasons the Roman Empire lasted for so long and so successfully was because (even though far from perfect) the Romans managed to respect and become partners with the countries they ended up conquering and were able to annex through treaties and peace accords other lands. However in the end it was still conqueror vs conquered and as the Roman Empire become more and more of a cesspool itself, it was impossible to maintain. Then a "lesser than" people whom they called barbarians pretty much put an end to it.

    • Clay, in all fairness some of what has occurred in Africa was brought about by the power vacuums created by the withdrawal of the Euro-colonizers. Take Angola. It was granted independence in 1975. Soon after the Cubans were there at the behest if the USSR to...wait for it....colonize a new Marxist state. Then Marxist governments evaporated and were replaced by Islamic theocracies. Further, you have the tribal issues made worse by arbitrary national boundaries. Not that different than the former Yugoslavia. It is really complicated history but to simply say it is a black thing might be an oversimplification.

      • It is true that once colonization ended destabilization happened, but that is not to state that Africans deserved colonization or that they were in need of colonization. Colonization in of itself is forced rule by a minority over a majority of people and that is not sustainable. I think that instead of might and power there could have been mutual benefitial partnerships, it wouldn't have lead to destabilization which lead to many of those countries being prey to other autocratic rules.

    • Excellent column and a cautionary tale for the US. The nanny state British government infantized its population. Why would anyone be surprised by this rioting? Beginning with The Great Society, America, it seems, has been traveling down this same road. We see this in people like Olivia and the people she claims to advocate who have absolutely no moral compass. There is little value placed on life, the culture has become coarse, and we are left with a dystopian society brought on by a minority arrogant enough to presume what the rest of us need or should have.

      Secular humanists are a liberal fantasy that in the end is a nightmare for the society unfortunate enough to be led by them.

  • Sorry Guys but I would have to agree with the first comment posted that so many voted down. Unlike, most of you who voted down his comment, I agree it is a black culture problem. Look at the world today and tell me what continent has the most problems, famine and disease. RIght now Somalia is killing off its own people and raping the women and children. Mugambe ran Zimbabwe into the ground and took away all the farmland that white owners had. If they didnt leave, he killed them. Johannasberg was a beautiful city when I went there back in 1986, but I wouldn't dare recommend it to any one who is white. I think many years of this PC crap has conditioned everyone of you guys to not think rationally and consider something that racist if it putsd down a culture. This is the first time I have posted on this website but read it all the time, I am afraid you are all being hypocrits because you guys are the first ones to say something about Islam if you dont agree, but you don't want to get to the root of the problem in the African culture and just dismiss it as racist. Lets see if those white people attacked by mobs of black people just 2 weekends ago at the Wisconsin fair agree with most of you guys?

    • Wow.... I have to say that your post is immature, ignorant and has racist inclinations.

      What countries colonized many African countries? and what countries are the worst off right now in Africa and who is in control?

      Somalia is an excellent example. It may have not been "perfect" before colonization, but it was a budding society that was prosperous and important. It was doing alright. Then the 19th century happened and with it, Imperialism, where both the British and Italians vying for control over the land. Not everything was necessarily bad, but nationals wanted control over their own country and they believed that they could get it through Marxist ideology, leading to nationalism and socialism. A marxist/communist government took hold. As we all should know, socialism/marxism/communism sucks and it failed, and civil war broke out. The country is now a mess and fell prey easily to Islamists. Less than 1 percent of national Somalis are Christians (or anything else) and that is so because Christians (and others) are heavily persecuted, raped, incarcerated and murdered. More than 90% of national Somalis are Sunni Muslims and many areas are heavily controlled by Sharia/Muslim laws and other parts are just chaos and anarchy. It went from a lush country with industry, commerce and agriculture to a cesspool and it had helped along the way and the help was not all due to "black problem".

      If you look at the world today, you may see that a lot of countries that are in war or chaos are controlled or are about to be controlled by Islamists. Also a lot of these countries have history of colonization by Imperialist European countries and in response many took to Marxism to relieve their countries of these Imperialism and that of course failed. Let me just state in case you don't know or haven't realized, that European countries were at the time (and still today) mostly inhabited by white people, Karl Marx was white and Arabs/Persians/Middle Easterns (where Islam originates from) are considered caucasians.

      One can make the case that had white people not intervened with might, power and totalitariasm in these countries, they (the inhabitants of African countries) could have perhaps done just fine on their own, after all, there is great examples of African countries that are doing just fine, great or fantastic and you would find that even if they had colonization history they are not heavily controlled by Islamists and/or they did not/do not lean towards socialism.

      I am going to put my theologian cap and state that the racist notion you are spewing is the work of evil forces that want you to believe that this is a "black" problem. This is a HUMAN problem. Please do not see things through color of skin, see things through the prism of Human Kind being fallen. No group of people are perfect. I hope you are not one of those that believes that Blacks were better off being slaves? Even though it is true that it was African that sold their own to Europeans, interestingly enough most of the countries that did so were under Islamic control. I don't however want to just blame whites and muslims for Africa and black problems. It is true that the Black communities around the world should take more responsibility, be less of victims and more conquerors and victorious. The thing is that INDEED many African and Black communities/countries are indeed being prosperous and victorious. We also see a lot of white people that are crazy. We live in a world that evil and no group of people is abstain from either being evil or receiving it.

  • Big Jim is obviously a RAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST for even NOTICING that they were all black; cracker had it comin'.

  • This article is for everyone:

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/ballerina-olympic-ambassador-arrested-london-sweep-152907901.html
    This is a related article from the article above: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8696977/London-riots-Straight-A-student-Laura-Johnson-faces-being-thrown-out-of-university.html. Please take the time to click on the related articles stemming from the main one as they provide pictures of the rioters. As you will see, they are all a good mixed bunch. There was also an organic chef who may or may not be white, but again all of this goes against the gripe that this is the poor and desanfranchised and CONSIDERING THE VAST AMOUNTS OF MIXED people, it is not a riot based upon any one group of people as far as race or socio-economic is concerned.

    "Cameron's former adviser Danny Kruger wrote in the Financial Times that the riots are the "intifada of the underclass." But among those arrested are a straight-A Exeter University student whose family wealth makes it unlikely she would loot out of necessity, and a 24-year-old college graduate and aspiring social worker whose mother said, "She didn't want a TV. She doesn't even know why she took it," according to The Daily Mail."

    This riot is not about the disenfranchised, the poor, the illegal and "minorities" being angry. This is about people taking the opportunity to become lawless thugs regardless of their socio-economic status and the color of their skin. It is about having fun and sticking it to the man. It is about childish people and those who feel entitled. There are even reports of PARENTS laughing at the fact that their children participated, and not taking it seriously because there was no cause for them to participate in the first place. It is disgusting.

    I have always disagreed with London having cameras at every corner, but I have to say in this particular case, it seems to have paid off in getting the scumbags.

  • That reporter personifies everything that is wrong journalism schools and with the MSM (ours and England's). They've already made up their minds, the narrative has already been written, it's the responsibility of "the people" to adhere to the story line that was written for them. Big Jim's refusal to say what the reporter demanded he say irritated the reporter, I'm only surprised that the interview was not erased and a more pliable victim found.

  • If the reporter were a true journalist, she would have just let his decription of the rioters slide and gone straight into some real questions that viewers might care about: Did you see anyone get injured? What damage did you witness? Were there any police on site and if so, did they do anything to stop the rioters?

Related Post
  1. Bin Laden death photos show “brains hanging out of the eye socket.” Cool.
  2. Chris Matthews to become spokesman for NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association)?
  3. James Cameron goes to the Amazon, bores the hell out of natives